Study Finds Benefits of Liberal Sports Betting Regulation for Sports Integrity, Consumer Protection, and Tax Revenues
The International Betting Integrity Association (IBIA) has released a study on the availability of sports betting products and its impact on consumer protection, regulatory oversight, taxable revenue, and sports integrity. The study, conducted by H2 Gambling Capital, examines data from sports betting operators, IBIA alerts, and H2’s market data. It was developed in collaboration with various industry associations.
Key Findings of the Study:
1. Wide availability of sports betting products reduces the risk of fraud on unlicensed markets and increases the proportion of consumers who bet with regulated operators.
2. Specific betting markets like football and tennis have a significant influence on the overall market and consumer behavior, especially in Europe.
3. Betting products like in-play, side markets (cards and corners), and prop bets have a major impact on consumer behavior.
4. Restricting the availability of certain markets through regulation leads to higher usage of unlicensed offshore operators and does not effectively prevent betting or protect sports integrity.
Khalid Ali, CEO of IBIA, emphasizes the importance of allowing a wide range of sports betting products to protect consumers, sports integrity, and maximize tax revenues.
David Henwood, Director at H2, supports this view, stating that limiting the choice of onshore bet types is counterproductive, and jurisdictions that have a high channelling rate focus on offering a broad product choice.
The study also highlights the growing global popularity of sports betting and forecasts that the industry will be worth $94bn in gross win by 2024, with over 70% of bets placed online. In-play betting is expected to account for nearly half of all online sports bets.
Comparing different regulatory approaches, the study finds that jurisdictions with a wide range of betting products, like Great Britain, have a higher onshore consumer channelling rate compared to countries that restrict access to important betting markets.
The study’s findings have significant implications for tax revenue and market oversight. It predicts that countries like Australia and Germany could gain billions in incremental tax revenues over the next five years by permitting online in-play betting.
The findings also provide important insights for policymakers in new jurisdictions considering online sports betting regulation. Brazil, for example, could see $34bn in onshore sports betting turnover by 2028 with a regulatory framework that prioritizes product availability.
Ontario’s experience is also relevant, as the region, following a licensing system, is expected to achieve a 92% onshore sports betting channelisation rate in 2024, while the rest of Canada is forecasted to have an 11% rate and lose significant taxable revenues.
In conclusion, the study underscores the benefits of liberal sports betting regulation in terms of consumer protection, sports integrity, and tax revenues. Policymakers in both established and emerging markets can learn from the findings to create effective regulatory frameworks.